jeffbiologist
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2007
- Messages
- 1,440
- Reaction score
- 14
OK, so you think that we can't get turnovers any more because Asante Samuel isnt here? How many turnovers do you expect will evaporate because of 1 player not being here?
Even if you think it is 4 plays that Samule made that no one else ever could, that is ONE TIME A MONTH that we are on the field longer. How can that have much of an impact on anything?
I think that just about every team we played last year tried to 'limit possessions'. Just pointing to the fact that a few times teams were successful and games were closer, doesn't mean teams will be any more successful.
Its like saying if we commit 3+ turnovers, we are more likely to lose, and using that as a reason we will lose more, by citing examples of games where we had 3 + turnovers in the past.
I dont have the numbers or the time now to look em up...but knowledge of the system and being better playmakers--Samuel, Colvin, Gay and Seau(combined for like 4 defensive TDs) add up to at least 8 more turnovers than the current roster. Now alot of turnovers come in garbage time, but some come in key situations. But I say that turnover difference is going to be noticable. The roster shuffling alone will cost us at least a game or 2(cohesion in the defensive backfield leading to more big plays), but I do expect progress and we should be in every game. But I will consider the D a work in progress til the 4th quarter of the playoffs.